tv Ways Means Chair Kevin Brady Talks Tax Reform With Politico CSPAN November 4, 2017 6:16am-6:59am EDT
monday. and listen live using the free c-span radio app. >> during tuesday's washington journal, we were live in baton rouge, louisiana. louisiana secretary of state tom shepler will be our guest on the bus on washington journal. now, house ways and means committee chair evan brady of texas discusses the gop tax reform plan with reporters from politico. this is about 40 minutes. [applause] >> good afternoon. thank you so much for joining us.
\[applause] >> good afternoon. thank you so much for joining us. we are co-authors of the "politico" playbook. we are very excited for the event this afternoon. i want to thank all of you in the room and those on livestream and the cameras in the back who are joining us to have this great conversation with congressman kevin brady. obviously the timing could not have been better. he's chairman of the ways and means committee, writing the tax proposal that came out yesterday. so we're going to be going into all of the details of what's happened so far, what to expect in the coming days. >> thanks. before we get started with the program, i'd like to extend a special thank you to our partners at the business round table for their support in making this event possible. here to say a few words is joshua bolten, president and c.e.o. of the business round table. [applause] joshua: good afternoon. business round table is pleased to partner with "politico" for this event and to introduce chairman kevin brady. mr. chairman, it has to be said, after decades of false starts and frustrated expectations, what an amazing accomplishment
this week. i'm speaking, of course, about your houston astros wing the world series. \[laughter] \[applause] on top of that, you've crafted a pretty damn good tax reform plan, one that provides substantial relief for workers, families an businesses. we at the business round table applaud your comprehensive approach. from the business standpoint, we've long believed that successful tax reform must allow u.s. companies to compete and succeed in the global economy. increasing investment and hiring in the united states. when the business round table surveyed our members, who collectively employ over 16 million people, when we surveyed them about how they would change their plans if the kind of tax reform plan the chairman brady
has put on the table were enacted, 82% of the c.e.o.'s said they would increase capital spending at their firm. 76% said they would increase hiring. yesterday chairman brady said that the families who struggle the most have seen their pay checks leave for other countries. and that a 20% corporate rate would enable businesses to compete internationally and create jobs here in america. business round table agrees. a recent e.y. study found that if the u.s. had had a competitive corporate rate of the kind that chairman brady is proposing, the u.s. would have retained 4,700 companies that fled our borders in the last 13 years. mr. chairman, we commend this important step forward in the process and we strongly support your efforts to deliver legislation to the president's desk this year. ladies and gentlemen, house ways and means committee chairman kevin brady. \[applause]
he did the introducing for us. >> we have time for more question he did the introducing for us. >> we have time for more questions. the most important question i have, being married to someone from houston, is where did you watch game seven? or did you really watch it? mr. brady: so we were finishing up the tax reform plan. the parade in houston is today so i have one more day to milk this tie for the win. it's pretty exciting. we were finishing -- finishing up the tax plan. working on white boards on our design and i kept glancing at the tv but i was afraid. you know how when you look at a game and you think you'll jinx it? i was glance and then stop. finally at ninth inning, i said, ok, i'm all in on this. >> yes. ok. anna: let's start from 30,000 feet and kind of zoom out a
little bit. jake and i have been covering congress for a very long time. we see you in the hallway all the time. if you look back, republicans were saying the u.s. should cut taxes on job creators. translation: for rich people. you have taken pains their cut taxes on the middle class and middle income earners. talk about that ideological shift that seems to have happened and is much more populist rhetoric that we're hearing. mr. brady: i think we delivered that relief at every level. it's clear we're really driving a lot to middle class families because they need it. as josh said, you know, emphasis on growth and making businesses
competitive is also going to drive those paychecks. it's directly related. if you think about, it it's different than the reagan era today. so the reagan reforms were all about dropping those rates. what you see us do is not only have a rate cut at every marginal level, we do a lot below that rate number. clearing out the a.m.t., clearing out the disincentives, what we call punishments as you work up. and making great emphasis to encourage more of that business investment in our pass-through areas. at every level there is tax relief. i think we've done a in a good, balanced way. but my advice, you know, as you look at this simple postcard-style approach, which in washington, we may be cynical of this, in america there's this longing for it, look underneath the rates. you'll see an awful lot of good work done to help sort of get us out of your lives and you keep more of what you earn. jake: are we going to -- let's talk about that postcard. are we going to actually be filling out that postcard and nothing else? mr. brady: no. so here, when you add up your contributions, your savings plan, will you, if you have more than one added up on a work sheet, yeah.
you'll exclude some of your income, like social security, or if your combat pay, you know, excludes -- so, we'll use a work sheet like you do today. where you look at a table and write the number down for the postcard. yeah. but the point is this. can you imagine a code this simple so that we all know what each other's deductions are? because we have exactly the same ones. and we can name them. there is a power to that simplicity. it requires awfully bold changes. we've gone very bold on that simplicity. then we'll let the process sort of go forward from there. jake: some of your detractors would say you cut things like student loan interest, breaks on high medical bills. how do you respond to things
like that and especially when people say that you say you're cutting taxes on middle income earners and those are things a lot of people use? mr. brady: as we -- i think we addressed knows a really good way. doubling that standard deduction's incredibly important. because most americans don't itemize. they're left out of tax reform usually. now they're front and center to it. we lower those rates as well at every level. the family, you should take a look at this family -- new family credit. because it's pretty remarkable. it's not only increasing the child part of that from $1,000 to $1,600, but adding another $300 for each the parents and another $300 if you have a child in college or a parent that's moved in. and it's not just the number, which people are paying attention to. what we ought to be asking is, who gets to use this family credit? today child credit starts to phase out $110,000. that leaves a lot of families out. so we double that to $230,000 before phase-out. so for the first time a lot of families are going to get help
with their kids and these are tough choices. when you look at whether it's medical expense, student loan, adoption tax credit, something near and dear to me because we are adoptive parents. these are tough calls and the call is this. do we want a tax code that has special provisions you may use once in your life, or do we want a tax code that lowers rates and you get help every year of your life? that you choose whether you need it for student debt or for medical expenses or as we did, adopt our two children. so it is a big change from the way we have the code today. anna: talk to us about, as you changed this, taking on these hard issues, some of the traditional allies from republicans are against this bill. whether it's club for growth or some of the coke brother groups. realtors. homebuilders. what's driving that? mr. brady: i think it's early. i think our tax reform pro-growth groups are strongly supportive of this initial step.
we saw that pouring in yesterday as well. do we work to improve it at every step? absolutely. the realtor, for example, and the homebuilders, and we've worked with the homebuilders on the designing new home credit. i think, you know, has great measure. i would love to see that considered in this process. but at the end of the day, look, nothing drives home prices and home sales and home values like a strong economy. there's no substitute for it. so when you take where we're at today and you add another percentage point to that, you're going to see those home sales and home values in a very positive way. having said that, we're going to continue to work with the homebuilders and realtors going forward. to see if we can't make that case. jake: let's talk about some of the nitty gritty in this bill and where things stand. a lot of things are in flux. things will change in the markup. there's been increasing discussion on the hill from
members that we talked to about -- including the individual mandate repeal and fax reform, you've been skeptical of that. i know speaker ryan also wants to keep the issues kind of separate. it is a chunk of revenue that you might need and might be helpful to you. where does that stand? mr. brady: the president feels very strongly about including this at some step before the final process. he's told me that twice by phone and once in person. \[laughter] anna: message received. jake: you've heard it. mr. brady: that's a trend. so and members have as well. so there is -- and we've asked for the updated score to see exactly what there is. jake: recently? mr. brady: yeah. so there are, you know, pros and cons to this. health care into a tax reform about debate has consequences. especially one where the senate has yet to produce 50 votes on anything related to health care that i'm aware of. and so there is all those
considerations to think about as we're looking at this. so no decisions have been made. we're listening to the members and certainly the president as well. anna: to follow up on that, aren't you concerned that health care could muddy the waters? you have so much momentum, republicans are saying, we need to get tax reform done, it would just bog down the process? mr. brady: i don't know that it bogs it down but clearly you're bringing in a whole new element into pro-growth tax reform and clearly we're getting far more than 1/2 trillion dollars in tax relief. we're getting far more both because of growth but mainly because we're clearing out so many different provisions in the code to achieve that. and so just, again, putting health care in that mix, you know, there's pros and cons. anna: let's take -- this -- let's take this bill issue by issue. there are a lot of things to go over in a pretty short amount of time. let's start with the state and local tax deductibility.
mr. brady: what a surprise. start with that one. anna: this has been a sticking point. it's an important sticking point because you're going to need some of these kind of new york, new jersey, california republicans to get this bill passed. tell us what the issue is and can you solve it? mr. brady: let's start with the second. i believe we can. jake: that's a trend. every member tells us whenever they have a problem, you always think there's a way to solve it. that's a good demeanor to have. mr. brady: honestly, i haven't seen a problem yet that isn't solvable. that's been brought to us. some are harder than others. in this characters here's shoot. sort of challenge how we tax today. so we keep rates high on everybody, whether you itemize or not. then some use the state and local income tax. and then we all just sort of subsidize each other. rural to city, middle income to
higher income. state to state. here's the question. do we want to keep doing that? or do we want to lower the tax rates for everyone and you just pay your own? so washington doesn't care where you live or where you work, that's your call. we just have low rates. it is a big change from where we're at today. so here's how we tackle the problem. we're not restoring state and local income. we are restoring state and local property tax up to that $10,000 figure, which is twice the national average for deductions. that's incredibly helpful. but that isn't alone the solution. we've adjusted the income tax brackets. we've created this family tax credit and we've driven it way up into that middle class area for these high tax states. by the way, i don't know how they accept the level of taxation they do.
\[inaudible] it's just painful to see that. but we drive that, middle class and high is a different level. we drive the family credit up as well. we really target the state and property deduction. the end result of, that and i'll stop here, is that we are showing that families in high tax states are getting tax cuts. way up of that income level. because a combination of policies. that's why i think members from those states have now take a second look at what we're achieving. some still need more. and here's -- i said i was going to finish this up. i'll finish with this. we have a simple request. we want our families to be better off after tax reform than before. that's a pretty fair request. so do we. that's what we're working toward. jake: so macarthur said he wants it bumped up to $12,500.
is that on the table? mr. brady: bring the ideas. jake: that's an idea you'd be open to? mr. brady: bring the ideas. we're here to solve it. jake: another thing, todd macarthur, who appears to be enjoying this debate as he enjoyed the health care debate, said you dropped a bomb on him. i'm sure you've heard this quote already. when you changed the mortgage interest deductibility from $1 million today 500,000. which was unveiled to members in the meeting yesterday on capitol hill. talk about that and what your thinking behind that. because people from new york and new jersey, and there's not many republicans from new york and new england, but it seems like there's 100 with all the things they have to say, they say, listen, it doesn't take a lot in a place like new york to have $1 million home. in a place like, you know, a lot of other places across the country that would be a pretty far off thing. so talk about your decision, your thought behind that. mr. brady: i don't think that was a new post necessarily.
i think it's been -- jake: maybe now him. mr. brady: that's been part of the discussions on reform, on mortgage interest, for a while. simply because you're really trying to drive that deduction to that middle class. that half million dollar mortgage i think covers 90%-plus of americans. so you really are driving to that average american family. and again, we've thought fresh about every part of the tax code and how it works today. again, because these deductions really focused on the upper income or more. so our thought was, why don't we try to drive that -- those home ownership incentives down across the spectrum? so that's part of the discussion. jake: just one more question. there's been some concerns from members from all over the country about the second home deduction, which seemed to be a first world problem.
a lot of states have big vacation communities. you're not moveable on that, right? you've eliminated the mortgage interest on second homes and that's probably here to stay? mr. brady: i've learned to never say never in tax reform. anna: we're going to nail you down on this one. mr. brady: you're not going to. \[laughter] that will be part of the discussion. anna: you talked about hearing from president trump on things that are important to him. individual mandate. another thing has been the corporate rate. that's something he's been very focused on. take us behind the scenes on. this he seems pretty hell bent on getting that rate to 20%. jake: some would say 15%. mr. brady: my experience has been terrific. he's been engaged on all the tax reform issues. both in substance and are we wants to go. he calls regularly. more often now. and just wanting in on these decisions. in fact, as we were finishing out sort of the last designs of what this initial bill would be,
we were difference, others on the phone with him running through these options to make sure we're all on the same page. because the whole purpose of this is to not do what we did in health care. where the house was never -- still may not be on the same page. that's why we spent months working with the white house and the house senate so there wouldn't be three tax plans or five tax plans. but one. so having that target drawn on the wall for the house and the senate to design to has been really helpful. so the time spent with the president is really crucial, i think, to getting it to his desk. anna: in terms of that, is that also an effort to -- that he doesn't bend down like a lot of republicans felt like on health care, when he was tweeting against the bill, it was a mean bill, things like that. mr. brady: he knows so much more about the tax code. health care for serve complicated. the tax code is as well. but we know our area of it.
we know what we use we know what affects our family or bills. we really know it well. and so from that standpoint, yeah, he's been extremely valuable. jake: a question from one of our colleagues, collin, who i think is in the audience. i don't see him at the moment. no. yeah, he's in the back. you've seen him in the hallway about a million times. why don't -- mr. brady: late at night. >> \[inaudible]
mr. brady: great question. how do you reconcile the house and senate? again, what's been incredibly helpful is to have that framework we agreed to. i think the senate will take some different paths to hit that target of the framework, which i think is healthy. the goal is to reconcile this at the end and their challenge, of course, is to move to through the senate. and so i believe having slightly different or maybe even substantially different designs to hit that target, that's a part of the process. i also am hopeful as we mark it up in committee next week, as we see where there are areas we can improve, we've thrown a lot of new stuff on the international side, on the small business pass-through side, on interest deductibility. we're going with significantly different concepts here. we expect to be incorporating those improvements and fine-tuning it and we hope they'll be part of the process. jake: there's been some -- one of the things we've heard from the outside groups is that there's a backdoor border adjustability tax that's going
hit consumers across the country in this bill. why are they saying that? mr. brady: my back is still sore from the discussion over border adjustability. there's nothing coming any direction there. so i think that's a silly notion. jake: what are they talking about? tell us what is in the bill. mr. brady: when we move from a worldwide system and territory, and that's imperative, we have to compete internationally. you have the potential for seeing your tax base erode and creating actually more open doors. so every country that does this has to have a way, and we've watched this here in america, where companies can export their earnings or profits, their patents, their pricing and import their deductions and expenses and all that inward. so we have to stop that. the way we address that are really two provisions that are a combination of a lot of them, that deal with the outbound exporting of profits and the inbound importing of deduction and interest and all that. it is, i thought originally border adjustment was a way to address that in a simple way. that had to be set aside. so now we're back to a mixture of sort of traditional how do we
do these from the camp tryout, as well as fresh new approaches here. we expect a lot of input and feedback from industry on that. that's a good thing. at the end of the day, you have to have that equal treatment so that, whether it's u.s. company whose real revenues and earnings are originating here, they just look like they're overseas, or that foreign parent doing the same thing, you have to have a level playing field for that. we want industry to look at those designs, bring us back that and that's one of those areas i think we'll continue working that through conference.
anna: another lingering issue was pass-through rates. obviously been very difficult, nfib, small business association, lined up against this early. based on the way the rules are written, a lot of these advocates feel like their members are going end to up paying higher tax. how do you fix that? or is it something that needs to be fixed? mr. brady: there's no chance they're paying higher taxes. in any way. and i know this because our pass-through businesses in
total, we're devoting over half a trillion dollars in tax relief for those businesses. somebody's getting that. we believe it's main street businesses going forward. but remember what we're trying to do. in the past corporate rates were the focus of most tax reform. in the past, since the reagan reforms, a big shift has been to the pass-through side. we made an early decision we're not going to leave them behind. but to do that, you need to separate business from wage income. really hard to do. it's complicated. we knew that coming in.
so the current design we've given our businesses are two options. sort of the short form and the long form. we all know that in the tax code. the short form is for businesses to say, you know, 70% of what you earn is wages and 30% are business. we're going to cap the 30% at 25%. you're going to get tax relief. but the second option is, a capital option, which is basically says, look, if you're a business, you're building your own. that's your trucks you have, that's your equipment that you've bought. you've invested capital. you're a business. you can expose much more of that to that pass-through rate of 25%. we may need to have other options in there. or change some of those to make sure we do it right. but at the end of the day, the
decision to make sure our pass-throughs are more competitive and make -- and they can invest more, this is a great discussion to be having. jake: something that's going -- we'll go to consume questions after this. before we get back to blabbing. anna: they are nonthreatening. jake: this isn't something that's going to impact everybody in this room and something that i've heard a lot of members ask me or want you to answer. will these tax cuts be retroactive? meaning, will they begin with -- at the beginning of this tax year instead of next? mr. brady: we want to accelerate the growth. retroactivity is difficult to do. ask any accountant, ask any business, ask any family. when you go backwards, it creates real challenges fast. at the end of the day, i think what's being requested of, let's make sure this tax reform shows up in families' paychecks soon. the businesses have incentive to invest soon. i mean, immediately. so that's what we're looking at those options to see how we can deliver. that i think there's no doubt you're going to see growth in jobs in pay checks, in economic growth very soon. the question is, could we in some way deliver that tax relief for families? we, will we know. families starting january 1 will be able to adjust their withholdings so they get a bigger paycheck starting in january. not next april. but is there more we can do? we're looking at that. jake: it sounds like the answer
is you'd like to do it. it's difficult but the priority is getting tax relief across the finish line in the quickest way and easiest way possible. mr. brady: if we can make adjustments to help provide even more immediate relief, let's do it. jake: ok. question from the audience. wow. no questions. mr. brady: thanks for having me. oh. i thought i was out the door. \[laughter] jake: no way. there's a clock there. mr. brady: so close. questioner: for full disclosure, i am a tax lawyer. mr. brady: now i have to go. \[laughter] jake: you were dealing with just reporters before. questioner: i have a very straightforward question. although i would like to ask you more. but on your pass-through tax rate of 25%, it strikes me that this might be difficult administratively to police. i'm wondering if you've had thoughts about that. mr. brady: we have. the reason for starting first with the 70/30 was to tweak that sort of simple option where you're not really haggling with the i.r.s. over what's reasonable compensation and all
that. so we tried to find that simple form, a lot of small businesses would likely use. and create that second option that really differentiated between that wage earner and that business. so that's why we got to these initial provisions. we're getting a lot more feedback on options. we're also -- professional services want to know, is that capital option available to me? the answer is absolutely yes. so look at the doctor that has his own practice. the doctor in the practice, you know, owns that equipment. has made those capital investments. should qualify for at that lower pass-through rate and just have to make sure, if we stick with these approaches initially, that they get relief as well. hard to do. but again, i think this discussion is something we need to have if we're going to not leave pass-throughs behind and we're not. anna: one more question from the audience. then go back to us. questioner: hi there. tyler smith. i had a quick question about a political article that was written last night that said something about americans who
made more than $1 million in taxable income would trigger an extra 6% tax on the next $200,000 they earn effectively creating a 45.6% unannounced tax bracket. mr. brady: not exactly accurate but from this standpoint, so in the current code there is a bubble rate for a part of earnings above $1 million, 39.6% bracket rate. it was done to try to drive more middle class tax relief earlier in those rates where we really do well, both for the family of four making $59,000 and that small business making $62,000. that's a $3,000 tax cut. we're really successful there. there is a portion that has a bubble rate but to finish the sentence, again, the reagan
reforms were about the rates. we're about clearing out underneath the rate. so a family making a million, a household making a million dollars today, because their see tax relief at every floor as the elevator goes up, they see relief there, at the end of the day there's tax relief at every income level from the bottom to the top. including at the $1 million household as well. much of that comes from the -- their investments in corporation, compensation tends to change in those households. so you're seeing tax relief related to growth and investment. which is again what we want to reward in this. anna: thank you. we've gotten to the nitty-gritty, let's talk about the process. this has been a long time coming. i remember us sitting down talking about the tax backpack. mr. brady: that was health care. anna: what was most surprising for you in this process? mr. brady: huh. i think, one, it's been wonderful.
this is -- jake: it's only just begun. mr. brady: this has an amazing opportunity. think through all the chairmen before me i respected and worked with, from bill thomas, paul ryan, dave camp. getting this opportunity, these are all good days, difficult as they are. i think the ferocity of the status quo. this tax code has fierce supporters and champions from the smallest provisions to the largest. very aggressive to defend that status quo. here's the challenge. you didn't row -- you can't lower rates, can't become more competitive if we keep everything just as it is. you've got to challenge provisions to get to where we want to get. so that is, it's not a surprise. it's just an hourly part of tax reform. not daily, an hourly part of this discussion.
jake: a lot of people haven't watched, next week you start marking this thing up, you'll go into committee a lot of people here have not watched a ways and means markup, as exciting as they are, they're not appointment television for some. tell us what we should -- mr. brady: you don't really mean that, with this audience. jake: that's true. what should we expect? what is it going to look like? how late are they going to go? give us a flavor of what to expect. mr. brady: it's going to look like it's long. so we've -- monday we begin at noon, first time in 31 years. for republicans in the house, first time in half a century we've lead, initiated tax reform. pretty historical. we worked with our top democrat, congressman richie neil, structure this in a bad -- good, positive way. we want to do as much discussion as we can in working hours, though it may go later. trying to structure it so democrats have the best access to make the case for the amendment and our members as
well. i do expect to conclude by thursday of next week. before the veterans day holiday. four days of open, full throated debate with all these amendments in the tax code i think will let the american people see something they haven't seen in a long time which is real debate on a real tax reform plan in -- by the way, i invite you to read this bill. because unlike the affordable care act's 2,000-plus pages, this is about 249. jake: easy reading. mr. brady: i wouldn't say easy. it's digestible, it's big and bold, should be a fascinating debate. anna: do you expect to get any democrats to support this? mr. brady: i hope so. look. i say this but it's true. they're seeing the same thing in their community we're seeing.
i've had 19, 18 companies in texas, in our region that used to be headquartered in our home state and now they're overseas. there are young people leaving college that can't find the jobs they want. there are families with stagnant paychecks. there are a number of democrats, centrist democrat, especially who think the status quo won't work. we've been engaged for about a year with them since the house republican blueprint was put out. i'm hopeful -- they brought their priorities to us. i think we hit them in a big way. i don't want to be over-optimistic but at the end
they have -- about at the end of the tai if they can support this plan or not, but if they're looking for middle class tax relief, stopping jobs from going overseas and actually bringing them back, i think they'll like what's in here. jake: you don't expect any amendments on the floor? mr. brady: no. jake: why? mr. brady: there's nothing like changing the biggest economy on the planet, changing the tax code in front of the world, to see really bad things happen. so the work will be done in the committee and before we take it to the rules committee. then later in conference. jake: you're saying the house can be an unruly place at times? mr. brady: i'm saying a legislative process tied to the complexity of the tax code, deliberate, thoughtful, and we listen to these members before we bring it to the floor. jake: how do you anticipate trump's involvement going forward? mr. brady: it's been positive in a big way. traveling the country making the case. he's using twitter to make the case as well. he's been all in on the rollout.
yesterday met with a number of us, including the ways and means committee, who delivered i think a tremendous product. he's going to stay engaged. his cabinet is staying engaged while he's traveling. i know he'll be consulting. you need a president to make the case around the country for a dramatically different tax code. jake: one page. mr. brady: work sheet. families will be thrilled with that. you asked what surprised me, i think what surprised me through the process is the power of simplicity. i think we underestimate in washington, d.c., how frustrated people are with this code. they want -- and when we ask, like in town hall meetings, i do a lot of them, do you want something this fair and simple? are you willing to give up all this to get there? you'd be surprised that the answer is, could we really have something this fair? and the answer is, we can. we've got to make some tough
choices, and i don't worry about, you know, that it's -- that it finishes with a postcard like this. we ought to, as members of congress, make changes, whether we add or subtract or otherwise, but boy, we get one shot every three decades to make some changes, why not go for fairness that people have only kind of dreamed about? anna: let's talk about that. the political impact. we're about out of time here but that's something that everyone tells us is incredibly important to republicans' 2018 prospects do you agree? mr. brady: i do. we've not delivered on our promise on health care repeal. it's critical we deliver on our promise on tax reform. do it in a timely way. we're on track to do that. this is the challenge of a
lifetime. we know this legislatively. this won't be just an easy, smooth, every hour is terrific. it won't be. it's going to be the process of washington. which never is that way. end of the day if we achieve this or near to it, we have delivered on our promise in a big way. anna: you say timely, how soon does it need to get done? mr. brady: right now we're on target for the end of the year. jake: do you think that is going to hold? mr. brady: i think it can. jake: you're not hellbent on it the way others seem to be if i it goes to january or february the world doesn't end? mr. brady: true. urgency creates decision making. if you've got time -- you know washington. if the deadline is midnight they'll start working on it about 11:30 and work on it into the next day. so having deadlines to force people to the table, to resolve things, i think are helpful. jake: quick question. do you think -- there's been a lot of chatter recently about turning to health care again at the beginning of 2018. are these differences reconcilable between house and
senate and all the different regional and ideological? mr. brady: on the health care side of things? i sure hope so. we want the senate to produce something. find some improvement to get out of there, see if we can find some common ground in that area. i also know among house republicans, we -- having a stronger economy means you need more workers. skilled workers. so we -- i know the speaker has given us the direction to follow with what some call welfare reform but what we're thinking of is how do we create opportunity for those in poverty today? how do we get them into a good-paying job with the skill ours businesses need? it's critical to growth in a big way. so i know too we're planning to make that pivot as well. anna: all right. chairman brady, unfortunately we are all out of time. we want to thank you all for joining us this morning a special thanks to the table for
then, a house hearing on reconstruction efforts in afghanistan. after that, defense secretary james mattis and secretary of tillerson testified before the senate foreign relations committee on the authorization for the use of military force. >> joined us this weekend for book tv live, at the texas book festival in austin. coverage begins today at 11:00 eastern and includes liza mundy. michael heard. young, author of, "bunk." author of a, "farewell to ice," and ellen